Thursday, September 06, 2007

AFL-CIO, alongside ACLU, as new open borders advocacy group?

The US' largest union federation and the risibly selective ACLU have teamed up to go after the Homeland Security Department for issuing "no-match" letters to some 140,000 employers:
The AFL-CIO and ACLU yesterday sued to stop the Homeland Security Department from cracking down on illegal-alien workers, asking a federal judge to halt new checks on employees' Social Security numbers because they could violate workers' rights and lead companies to preemptively fire American workers.

The labor union federation and the civil liberties group are the latest critics to attack the new rules, arguing that because of errors in the Social Security database, U.S. citizens and legal immigrants will get caught up in the process, and businesses will use it as an excuse to go after legal workers.
They shopped their case to a district court under the Ninth Circuit's jurisdiction. Immediately, the federal district judge ordered a suspension in the sending of the letters, which were to go out later this month. The Ninth is the most sympathetic circuit when it comes to the demands of the open borders coalition. Just like that, the DHS was stopped in its (reluctant) tracks.

Prior to the rule changes slated to go into effect as the batch of no-match alerts were sent out on September 14, the letters were taken with a grain of salt. An employer's legal counsel would advise it to ignore the letters, and that would be the end of it until possibly another letter was sent the next year. Following the changes, employers who continued to ignore the letters would put themselves at risk of having had "actual knowledge" that an employee was not legally authorized to work. Any punitive actions taken would remain contigent upon ICE's initiative.

But this is about benefiting native workers, of course! Many of the letters will mistakenly be sent out to legal workers due to name changes or misspellings!

Nevermind that the employer has three months to rectify the confusion without any threat of action taken against it. Even after 90 days, if confusion remains, employers may submit a new I-9 form attesting to the employee being legally authorized to work. So in reality, the time frame is even longer than three months to get things right. While the existing problems are minor, we can surely expect when database issues are addressed (ie, states supply information on marriage licenses granted), both the ACLU and the AFL-CIO will enthusiastically back the baby teeth of the new no-match letter enforcement!

It may come as a surprise that union leadership is embracing unskilled immigrant labor. But John Sweeney understandably sees potential in the Hispanic inundation. It is politically inept, largely uneducated, lowly skilled, and unlikely to hold leadership's feet to the fire. Hispanic immigration provides a golden opportunity to gain lots of obsequious bodies. The percentage of US workers member to a union has steadily declined from almost 25% in the early seventies to about 11% today. These numbers are in aggregate. Private sector union membership has plummeted farther, to only 7% today. But the domestic decline has been partially offset by the rise in immigrant membership:
In the past decade, the number of immigrants who joined unions increased 30 percent while membership among their U.S.-born counterparts dropped 9 percent, according to a recent study by the Migration Policy Institute. Overall, union membership declined.
The AFL-CIO formerly announced its support for amnesty in early 2000, and has since promoted bilingualism in its literature and among its representatives. We are several years into the overt Hispanicization of American labor.

The biggest losers are working class natives who are being sold out by unions that are actively diminishing their prospects. Sensing this, Americans have been abandoning unions. I do not use the phrase 'sold out' carelessly. An analogy is found in one of the rudimentary rules of smart mutual fund investing: Steer clear of fund families that advertise heavily. They are using your capital to attract new investors. The money those new investors put in does not do you any good. Your money is already in, you're already on board, so shut up!

The Senatorial amnesty failure showed, however, that while the native worker may be muffled, he has not yes been muted. The AFL-CIO caved, directing its opposition specifically at 'guest worker' provisions, about the most conspicuously unfriendly arrangement possible from the perspective of a native worker.

But time isn't on the side of the native rank-and-file. US manufacturing continues to lose both domestic and global market share. The third-world continues to move into the US and out-procreate its natives, leading to a turgid supply of unskilled labor even as the necessity of such labor decreases, thereby putting downward pressure on wages.

To better the lot of our native left-half of the bell curve, we should end unskilled immigration. Build a wall along the US-Mexico border, hammer employers for using illegal subsidized labor, and cut off federal funds to 'sanctuary cities'. Institute a merit immigration system that brings in wealth-creating, net taxpaying, professional and skilled migrants. They will provide more demand for the labor of the unskilled without competing with that labor as unskilled immigrants do.

Additionally, we should abandon the federal income tax system in favor of a national consumption (sales) tax that will make the US a more competitive exporter while simultaneously removing the economic advantage employers enjoy in using illegal workers.

No comments: